September 6, 2011

I've already blogged about this speech, but I woke up this morning thinking there's something else about the speech that's worse than the murderous metaphor. Let's look at the text. I'll add some boldface to focus your attention on what I want to talk about now:

We got to keep an eye on the battle that we face: The war on workers. And you see it everywhere, it is the Tea Party. And you know, there is only one way to beat and win that war. The one thing about working people is we like a good fight. And you know what? They’ve got a war, they got a war with us and there’s only going to be one winner. It’s going to be the workers of Michigan, and America. We’re going to win that war... President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march… Everybody here’s got a vote... Let’s take these sons of bitches out and give America back to an America where we belong.

Hoffa is a labor leader, pushing the agenda of labor unions. The interests of the actually people who work may converge or diverge with the interests of labor unions. Don't let him conflate the 2 entities. He may say "we," but that doesn't mean he embodies everyone who works (or wants to work) in America.
He can't even get to supersede the individuality of the members of the Teamsters Union (the union he heads). Yes, he's empowered to bargain for them, but that eradicate their individual minds and personal political preferences. Yes, they take the deal he gets for them, but that doesn't mean that they all want what he brings them or that they want only that. Some of them, obviously, support different politicians. Some may hate being in a union. Some may like the union but prefer different policies.

Right now, unions are fighting to preserve unions, and that might be best for workers. But the individuals who work — or want to work — may very well think their interests lie elsewhere. I'd like to think that the vast majority of people who work resist the assertion that there is a "war on workers." It's quite clear that every serious politician in America cares about what happens to individual citizens. They're not aligned in an army against the citizens! They have different ideas about how to improve things. Hoffa announces that there are 2 sides aligned in a fight against each other, and he would like anyone who has or wants a jobs to perceive himself or herself as a "worker" and thus a foot soldier in his army, with no independent mind.

That's quite repulsive.

And by the way, the constant use of this word "workers" reinforces the notion of the collective. You can see that for Hoffa, "workers" mean "soldiers" — and obviously, soldiers take orders. They don't think for themselves.

Who gets to be a feminist? It's the wrong question. And debating it leads to the wrong answers.

Identity labels always mislead. They don't disclose the contents of the bottle; they proclaim that the bottle is powerful, meaningful, and important. Debates over who gets to wear those labels are tribal battles about who runs the group and who gets to patrol its borders, about who holds power.

Now ask yourself, "Who gets to be a worker?" and then reread Graff's paragraph in that context.

Obama's really showing where his priorities lie. It takes a little while for his decisions to cycle through and be visible to the public. Though, I still don't see him as a true Chicago politician and all that entails. The unions, greens, many, many blacks, and most progressives all see him as their best shot.

I could see him running the Illinois Dept of Education, getting tapped by a Dem president for something involving a lot of speechifying, maybe a Task Force on Education, and then he could write books about himself and go on tours.

A few nights ago while I was enjoying a quiet evening on my front porch, some union guy with a clipboard invites himself onto my property and started discussing the "war on workers". After a few minutes of discussion, he made it clear that I was not a middle-class working person because I was not in a union.

For the unions, it has always been the way. The union wants to control the workers just as resolutely as the company. The union insists on control, even over those workers it happily disserves.

My wife's first and only union job was working for New York State as a history museum tour guide. Her job was a temporary Summer assignment that paid minimum wage and offered no benefits. The union still took their cut out of her wages.

Unions exist to leech cash from actual workers paychecks to give to Democrats, who will work to destroy the industries that produce actual jobs via regulatory strangulation. Then the business owners are forced to bribe Democrat politicians to ease some of the burden by making exceptions to the law for them, but not anybody else, thus shutting out competition.

Unions are little more than cash leeches sucking the lifeblood of the workers to exist.

Following on from Henry I should state that I'm always amused/exasperated by the definition of "worker." Are not small-business-men, businessmen in general, salesmen, "white collar" professionals of every stripe--CPA, etc.,--to also include the clerks, etc., and other "gray -collar" technical types "workers" also who "earn" a "paycheck" "providing" for their families in JUST the same way "factory-floor" types do insofar as their remuneration is tied directly to their toil? By what historical/cultural process has the term "worker" come to have such a restricted definition in the lexicon of American's civic-culture? A rhetorical question, I realize, but nonetheless, "Inquiring minds" and all that...ought to be at least a Master's thesis in their somewhere..

Thank you for clarifying the issue so well. I agree with you; the disturbing Idea in that speech has considerably more depth than a headline or a soundbite can fathom. Scary stuff, for sure. It is almost like what I imagine the pre-battle pep talk for the Orcs of Mordor would have been...

The unions have been using the "working man" thing for a long time to imply that, if you're not in a union, you don't work and are therefore one of The Rich, who are so evil. This has been a propaganda ploy since the 30s. And here I thought they were the working class.

This is the same sort of dodge as Lefty Indians calling themselves Native Americans as if no one else has a right to be here.

Now they apparently want to presume they're the middle class and all those entrepreneurs who actually are the middle class are part of The Rich. Dovetails nicely with somebody's tax agenda.

And, yes, I would take Hoffa's threats seriously.

It runs in the family.

Ann Althouse said...

Some may hate being in a union.

But they have no choice because their state forces them to join a union if they want to work in their particular trade.

PS The last time we heard that much about the workers, it was coming from a guy named Lenin.

Unions were born out of a zero-sum game analysis of economics - that it was necessary for the bosses to lose for them to win what they believed was rightfully theirs.

And, at the time, there was some merit to this argument, albeit never as much as the unions themselves believed.

But as time and the economy progressed, the unions stayed stuck in the past, fighting battles long since won, stupidly failing to adapt to new realities, growing evermore reliant upon the public sector to secure their place in the economy.

That Hoffa is too stupid to recognize this reality is obvious. His rhetoric, while offensive, only betrays how weak, how retrograde, how stupid the labor union movement and its primary beneficiaries, the Democrats, are regarding the world we live in now.

They'd happily turn the clock back to regain lost power, and make threats of violence to reclaim that power, all in vain. The death throes will become more violent, but the unions will finally pass.

I'd like to think that the vast majority of people who work resist the assertion that there is a "war on workers." And I would like to think that the vast majority of the middle class which has seen their jobs outsourced, their wages decreased, and their mortgages underwater while the two percent of the super rich get richer would wake up to the facts. As noted by a recent study, nearly 60 million U.S. workers say they would join a union if they could!

Big Labor is a joke. For the most part the Union thugs negotiate to have its members work less and get paid more. They're not "workers." They don't represent "workers." The public employee unions are even worse. Taxpayers work hard so they don't have to. F them.

"And I would like to think that the vast majority of the middle class which has seen their jobs outsourced, their wages decreased, and their mortgages underwater while the two percent of the super rich get richer would wake up to the facts."

The biggest threat to this middle-class guy is the doubling of my property taxes to fund golden benefit packages of unionized public employees. Everything else you mention, I can avoid through prudent decision-making on my part or willingness to work harder.

The unions are just showing their Communist roots are very much alive.

Very communist phraseology.

One of my first thoughts was how many true "workers" are there in unions? Few workers in unions work like the rest of us, especially pubic employee unions. (Post office, anyone???) Unions want the real workers to subsidize their overpayed, under-performing "workers."

As the resident "hipster," or Liberal, or Mandarin class or what ever is the latest put down for Shouting, I admit I have limited experience in unions. I did try to start one in a Brooklyn sweat shop and was fired after our first meeting, I helped organize a tenant's union in Milwaukee, and was part of a group of news photographers, who with great difficulty, won union recognition. Presently I do not belong to a union, but have talked with professor at Temple who are glad they have a union and can see that as possible here.

When I got into radio as an on-air guy, the industry's union was all over me. At first, I wasn't sure what to do about it, but had heard about SAG and such and figured it was the same deal. After asking around and calling some of the various bigger stations locally, I found out that nobody outside a major market (ie, 1-20, New York through roughly St Louis) gives a shit about the broadcaster's union because a) it does little to nothing for their members, b) spend their dues on political campaigns the members may not agree with, and c) being only relevant in the major markets, tend to be made up of members making the top 10% of broadcasting salaries anyway and, thus, far better able to handle their own affairs.

It used to be mandatory to have to join the broadcasters union in order to work in a radio station. It also used to be mandatory to have a broadcasting engineer's certification to even touch a broadcast studio panel, even if you were just on-air (pushy buttons and talky-talky). Guess who came up with that requirement and guess how strictly it's followed these days?

Was it Herbert Scarf who mocked up the maths showing it takes only three products for economic systems to attain global (global in ecologies) catastrophe? Because there’s no invisible hand. The invisible hand is in our mind. A fantasy. Point is, after three products – regulation is required. So union mafia bosses regulate political mafia bosses. Net system result - control fraud. But, only in certain cases. God bless Benjamin Nathan Cardozo. For overcoming his heritage of one-foot-in-each-camp Tammany Hall.

True story - Friends we don't really see anymore life & world view, we went out. We always are non-committal & change the topic. She made a comment about working class and my hubby told her he was kind of offended at that statement because he works for a living. He owns his own biz, yes, but he works, he stays late, he works on the weekends, he brings work home.

We don't get 2 week vacations in a row. The last 10-day vacation he took was over 5 years ago. It's obviously slower now so he can come home earlier on a Friday, but still..........If U want to spend 2 weeks on a driving tour of the USA - fat chance.

They make more money than we do. She told me earlier that evening she felt guilty she was only working a 50-hour week during the summer & when the kids - who are older - went back to school she'd start working 70 hours again.

If you have a single union operating nurse who in Chicago can make $200k/yr, which classifies them as "rich," but they're union - what are they really?

It's such old world thinking. Like my mom said, that's an old designation when we were more of an agriculturally-based country.

"We got to keep an eye on the battle that we face: The war on workers. And you see it everywhere, it is the Tea Party. And you know, there is only one way to beat and win that war. The one thing about working people is we like a good fight. And you know what? They’ve got a war, they got a war with us and there’s only going to be one winner. It’s going to be the workers of Michigan, and America. We’re going to win that war... President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march… Everybody here’s got a vote... Let’s take these sons of bitches out and give America back to an America where we belong."

As someone involved in a small business, I can report that the truckdrivers always act like they've got a wild hair up their ass. They were non union in my business, but I don't expect union representation would improve their manners. There's something about driving that attracts combative personalities, or maybe just driving in metropolitan traffic brings out the latent fangs in human nature.....At any rate, I'm not surprised that Hoffa would give such a bristling speech. What is surprising is that he would give such a speech while introducing the President. It doesn't make Hoffa look tough. It makes Obama look weak and not in control of the forces he is supposed to be leading.

Professor, you hit the nail on the head here. Let me add the term "working man" as well. To me, there is nothing more insulting than the assumption that employees that belong to unions work, and the rest of us don't.

"But we've been talking about --- we have Saddam Hussein, this is the Mother of All Wars we've got in the next 18 months. For the life or death of this country. So, I'm not going to do this to put any pressure on anyone here, mind you. This is not pressure. But if this makes your heart feel glad and you want to be more forthcoming, then so be it"

Once again, let's try to air it out. I don't really give a shit about what he said as much as I think the hypocrisy from the same party that claimed since 2009 that the political discourse has gotten too violent is nigh intolerable.

Also...I noticed the Tea Party decriers constantly decry the Tea Partiers making comments about "taking the country back" and usually link it to slavery or some other such tripe. Used here, one would think that Hoffa wants to take America back from...who, exactly?

Unions are such wonderful things. Look at what they done for the rust belt. And Detroit is their crown jewel.The TEA Party should bring on to the unions, if we ever want to actually grow the economy to a point we have an actual labor shortage. Lets start with the repeal of the NLRB, the Wagner Act, the Davis-Bacon Act and a national-right-to-work law.

Did oil have anything to do with our kinetic involvement in Libya? You know, that little brushfire where we're on the same side as Al Qaeda? If not, why aren't we bombing the hell out of Syria's anti-air and armor?

Koch made his statement in front of a crowd of like minded people, in private. It was not a warm up speech for the President of the United States at an event pro porting to celebrate a national holiday, a holiday for all Americans.

"Did oil have anything to do with our kinetic involvement in Libya? You know, that little brushfire where we're on the same side as Al Qaeda? If not, why aren't we bombing the hell out of Syria's anti-air and armor?"

Who has oil interests in Libya? Britain, France, Italy maybe?

Millions dying in sub-Sahara Africa from war and famine. When are we going in?

"Koch made his statement in front of a crowd of like minded people, in private. It was not a warm up speech for the President of the United States at an event pro porting to celebrate a national holiday, a holiday for all Americans."

The issue is about the "war" rhetoric, right? If Hoffa had a different tone there would be no issue, right? What's the different about Koch's "war" references from Hoffa's? I see none.

Comrade Garage. Yes, i believe they would because that language, in that group, would be coming from an outsider. Not our sort, comrade. Not our sort. We tend to try and convert those with whom we disagree and tend not to thinknthe way you apparently do.

Comrade Garage. Yes, i believe they would because that language, in that group, would be coming from an outsider. Not our sort, comrade. Not our sort. We tend to try and convert those with whom we disagree and tend not to thinknthe way you apparently do.

They, the capitalist Ford Motor pigs are so defeated by us, the angelic Big Labor that they build their $billion factory in India to avoid us the angelic Big Labor. Good riddance. We labor want to make good money not work hard jobs.

Again, have you ever lived in Korea? Do you know how they work and live? Think about why it's the Mexicans who pick our produce in this country. Are you ready to work the fields for min wage and no benefits?

Not just cheaper...dirt cheaper. Explain to me how it's more cost efficient for an infrastructure project, paid for by taxpayers, to import steel from India rather than have it produced domestically (lower 48). You have to include not only the cost of the steel, but the cost of shipping literally to the other side of the planet.

Figure in all of those costs and they were STILL willing to work for not just less, but much, much less. What does that tell you?

If you're a publicly traded company beholden to shareholders, are you willing to take it in the pants to pay American workers the highest wages in the industry, or do you reduce those costs and manufacture somewhere where salary costs + transportation...to the other side of the planet...are cheaper?

Speaking to 36fsfiend's neo-protectionism, is not the workers theme song The Internationale? Is not the rise of the Korean worker to be celebrated? I, for one, am proud that capitalism has raised billions of people from abject poverty, increased their health and welfare, and given them opportunities for education, advancement and happiness. It is a marvelous thing that international trade not only benefits the wealthiest countries with lower-cost products and a greater variety of goods, but alleviates world poverty at the same time.

"Not just cheaper...dirt cheaper. Explain to me how it's more cost efficient for an infrastructure project, paid for by taxpayers, to import steel from India rather than have it produced domestically (lower 48). You have to include not only the cost of the steel, but the cost of shipping literally to the other side of the planet."

"Figure in all of those costs and they were STILL willing to work for not just less, but much, much less. What does that tell you?"

"If you're a publicly traded company beholden to shareholders, are you willing to take it in the pants to pay American workers the highest wages in the industry, or do you reduce those costs and manufacture somewhere where salary costs + transportation...to the other side of the planet...are cheaper?"

Ah yes, greed the American way. Live in Korea for a few years and see if that's the lifestyle you want for your family. It's still considered a "remote" tour for the military for family support reasons.

Why are the shareholders not "real Americans" like Sister Sarah is so fond of saying and willing to take a little less in earnings to support the country?

Why are union workers paid the highest wages in the industry? What are they basing their expectations on when negotiating? Maybe they see all the goodies of the American lifestyle the shareholders have. So who is to blame for those expectations? Maybe there's greed on both sides, yes?

36. The Koreans are do ing much better now that they have jobs making steel that they sell to us. Do you want them to live like Koreans used to live? Where is your heart, man? No i have not lived in Korean. Also havent lived in Bhutan or Mali. You?

"Speaking to 36fsfiend's neo-protectionism, is not the workers theme song The Internationale? Is not the rise of the Korean worker to be celebrated? I, for one, am proud that capitalism has raised billions of people from abject poverty, increased their health and welfare, and given them opportunities for education, advancement and happiness. It is a marvelous thing that international trade not only benefits the wealthiest countries with lower-cost products and a greater variety of goods, but alleviates world poverty at the same time."

When we become a country like Brazil with only an oligarchy and the poor, who will invest in us to increase our health and welfare, and give us opportunities for education, advancement and happiness?

Why are the shareholders not "real Americans" like Sister Sarah is so fond of saying and willing to take a little less in earnings to support the country?

You're not this stupid. Do you honestly equate shareholders with Americans? You do realize that's not the case, don't you? Shareholders are not necessarily American citizens and do not necessarily give two shits about supporting our country.

For that matter, let's take your argument to Hollywood and biggest news media outlets. Don't you think they should maybe take a little bit less at the box office or in ad revenue in order to support our country? Or are they bad Americans too for making movies that criticize our politics, our culture, and our military? Are they bad Americans for publishing things in their newspapers and magazines that would better support the country if those stories were left unpublished? Are they bad Americans?

No, apparently you're only a bad American when you want to realize a good return on your investment.

Ah yes, greed the American way. Live in Korea for a few years and see if that's the lifestyle you want for your family. It's still considered a "remote" tour for the military for family support reasons.

I can see you haven't been to over there in a few years. Thanks to international trade, South Korea is in every respect a first world country these days, the only reason it's still a "remote" tour is the presence of the North Korean army a few miles to the north.

"36. The Koreans are doing much better now that they have jobs making steel that they sell to us. Do you want them to live like Koreans used to live? Where is your heart, man? No i have not lived in Korean. Also havent lived in Bhutan or Mali. You?

I want my country to succeed. Wealth is moving up and jobs are moving overseas.

Not Bhutan or Mali. Have spent some time in the Philippines and Malaysia. We don't want to live like the average person there either.

"I can see you haven't been over there in a few years. Thanks to international trade, South Korea is in every respect a first world country these days, the only reason it's still a "remote" tour is the presence of the North Korean army a few miles to the north."

Last time I was there was in 2006. Was also there in the 1980s and 1990s. I've seen the fantastic growth from the 1980s to now. And yes, they are allowing more families there now because of the improved conditions - more schools, better hospitals, etc. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, when our steel industry was being moved overseas, the conditions were not nearly what they are today.

"36f -- Your success would impoverish this country and the world. Trade is not a zero-sum game."

You know, I was watching a program - I think it was on CNN. They were interviewing the CEO of JAL, an elderly Japanese gentleman and his wife. At one point they were discussing his earnings and comparing it to his counterparts in the U.S. He was making something equivalent to U.S.$90,000 a year. The man would eat in the company cafeteria with his employees each day - nothing special and he and his wife lived in a very modest home - no mansion. When he was told how much American airline CEOs made each year, he and his wife just politely laughed and they both commented that they wouldn't know what to do with all that money.

It's brilliant stuff life this that convinces me that Sarah Palin should be our nominee.

What I say now, I say as a proud former union member and the wife, daughter, and sister of union members. So, as a former card-carrying IBEW sister married to a proud former Laborers, IBEW, and later USW member, please hear me out. What I have to say is for the hard working, patriotic, selfless union brothers and sisters in Michigan and throughout our country: Please don’t be taken in by union bosses’ thuggery like Jim Hoffa represented yesterday. Union bosses like this do not have your best interests at heart. What they care about is their own power and re-electing their friend Barack Obama so he will take care of them to the detriment of everyone else.

"...and do not necessarily give two shits about supporting our country." Bingo.

"For that matter, let's take your argument to Hollywood and biggest news media outlets. Don't you think they should maybe take a little bit less at the box office or in ad revenue in order to support our country? Or are they bad Americans too for making movies that criticize our politics, our culture, and our military? Are they bad Americans for publishing things in their newspapers and magazines that would better support the country if those stories were left unpublished? Are they bad Americans?

Why does the Hollywood and sports industries earn so much money? How come teachers, firefighters and military members don't make millions given what they do for the country? What does that say about our values?

@36 -- You've presented a great argument against your own point of view. To summarize, in the past 30 years, as South Korea has leveraged free trade to build its own manufacturing base, tens of millions of South Koreans have moved out of poverty and begun attaining health and wealth unheard of before in that country.

At the same time the United States has increased the income, health, and wealth of its own population even while absorbing tens of millions of mostly poor immigrants.

You know, I was watching a program - I think it was on CNN. They were interviewing the CEO of JAL, an elderly Japanese gentleman and his wife. At one point they were discussing his earnings and comparing it to his counterparts in the U.S. He was making something equivalent to U.S.$90,000 a year. The man would eat in the company cafeteria with his employees each day - nothing special and he and his wife lived in a very modest home - no mansion. When he was told how much American airline CEOs made each year, he and his wife just politely laughed and they both commented that they wouldn't know what to do with all that money.

I found that rather interesting.

Fascinating anecdote, but I'm not sure that holding JAL up as an exemplar of responsible, worker-friendly corporate governance makes much sense in view of the fact that they just went bankrupt last year and are just now in the process of shedding about a third of their workforce.

36. If we are becoming like Brazil because we upgraded the Koreans by buying steel from them what to do about marimbas and the fact that no one here speaks Portugese? You have created a circle of fear on the Althouse blog.

I say lets build high quality steel right here in the usa using non union labor just like they do In Alabama. New steel mills are not built in the old rust belt. Know why?

Ps. The Germans "shipped" us the steel making jobs, right from germany

David said...Althouse: "soldiers take orders. They don't think for themselves." In today's American military, they have to do both. One of the many difficult aspects of their job.

I believe AA's point was that Hoffa is likening workers to his idea of soldiers - take orders and do not think for themselves.

AA isn't implying that she shares that misconception about American soldiers. She's pointing out the impression from Hoffa of equivalency between workers and soldiers. And that behind that is his assumption that union members in his war on republicans will perform the same way his idea of the proper soldier tells him they would perform - unqualified, unquestioning obedience to the leadership.

36. What would happen if we paid our teachers as much as we pay Michael Vick? Would our children be better off or are you suggesting that our teachers are crappy because they dont get paid enough? Why would we pay more for something we can get for less. That is the question. Why.

"Fascinating anecdote, but I'm not sure that holding JAL up as an exemplar of responsible, worker-friendly corporate governance makes much sense in view of the fact that they just went bankrupt last year and are just now in the process of shedding about a third of their workforce."

My point was I found the JAL CEO's thoughts on personal wealth and difference between what he earned and his employees earned interesting.

Not sure of all the reasons why JAL went bankrupt. Howevere, we have had some pretty big banks go belly up here in this country. Yet, the CEOs still made millions courtesy of the U.S. tax payers.

You initially commented that union workers are paid the highest wages in the industry. I'm simply pointing out that one reason they want those high wages is because they are basing their expectations on what they see management is making. They see all the goodies of that lifestyle. If management was only making say 5 instead of 100 times what workers made, would that affect their expectations? There's greed on both side.

He is a leech sucking on the lifeblood of workers to maintain his fat cat union boss position and play power games with his pet Democrat/neo-commie political buddies. Hoffa calls for violence against the workers like me who oppose his commie politics and purchased political pets.

sitinotThis is the whole point. The public sector unions are at war with working taxpayers, who are workers. Hoffa stirs up workers saying Republicans and the tea party are against workers. These things do not follow in the least, and in fact are at odds. Can you imagine if the South attacked the North, and after Lincoln responded by attacking the South in defense of the North, someone portrayed Lincoln as an enemy of Americans? And both the South and the North attacked him? I don't understand how this plays in Wisconsin.

I'm simply pointing out that one reason they want those high wages is because they are basing their expectations on what they see management is making. They see all the goodies of that lifestyle. If management was only making say 5 instead of 100 times what workers made, would that affect their expectations? There's greed on both side.

But workers went to high school at most while management often went to graduate school as well as college with the attendant costs and risks. Then workers work 40 or fewer hours per week and have limited or no decision making requirements in their responsibilities. They make the product And go home. Management's commitment is vastly greater. Now the difference in pay, high to low, is interesting and there will be a lot of talk about the spread in the coming years because proxy statements will be required to publish data of that type. Comp committees might well put the brakes on increases as a result.

Very bad to count other people's money in my opinion. Only leads to envy, a sin in the old days.

"36. What would happen if we paid our teachers as much as we pay Michael Vick? Would our children be better off or are you suggesting that our teachers are crappy because they dont get paid enough? Why would we pay more for something we can get for less. That is the question. Why."

Why does Michael Vick get paid so much?

Why do people become doctors, besides of course their desire to help other people? Why become a surgeon - the king of the hill in the profession? Does the caliber of people who are attracted to the profession have anything to do with the rewards and benefits of the profession?

Michael Vick is paid what he is paid because we have a debased culture. We encourage our young to excel in sports and tell them that education is for nerds and losers. This is a liberal thing, 36, you should know that by now. We pay actors who know nothing a lot and people who know a lot a little. Fair, in case you have been out of town, is where they have rides and sell cotton candy.

Here is a tip for you, though, free. Start a company and pay your people more than you. Sell our product very cheaply so that the poor can afford it. Keep your company private and do not expand using proceeds from an ipo.

“But workers went to high school at most while management often went to graduate school as well as college with the attendant costs and risks. Then workers work 40 or fewer hours per week and have limited or no decision making requirements in their responsibilities. They make the product And go home. Management's commitment is vastly greater. Now the difference in pay, high to low, is interesting and there will be a lot of talk about the spread in the coming years because proxy statements will be required to publish data of that type. Comp committees might well put the brakes on increases as a result.”

“Very bad to count other people's money in my opinion. Only leads to envy, a sin in the old days.”

Michael,

I’m not saying that management shouldn’t earn more than workers. I think most Americans believe in fairness and certainly expect CEOs to be paid higher salaries. More responsibility should mean more pay. But when we see examples like those on Wall Street were CEOs of failed banks still walked away with millions, that sets up expectations in workers on what they believe should be their piece of the pie. If CEOs can fail and still earn millions, than why should we be surprised when workers ask for pay increases and benefits?

This rhetoric is not about unions at all. This is old marxist revolution rhetoric, from the workers of the world unite against wharever and whoever the last party memo says song and dance. Obama uses a lot of the same rhetoric but replaced "the workers" with working families etc. This is why his marxist roots do not come through for people that are not familiar more closely with the bulk of communist, and particularily Leninist, rhetoric.

36. So your point is that union workers are gripped with envy. Alas. There are many more workers than there are managers so maybe the workers should go back to school and see if they can rise way way uo in the ranks and get some of that easy money for themselves. Ornis it just easier to bitch.

"Michael Vick is paid what he is paid because we have a debased culture. We encourage our young to excel in sports and tell them that education is for nerds and losers. This is a liberal thing, 36, you should know that by now. We pay actors who know nothing a lot and people who know a lot a little. Fair, in case you have been out of town, is where they have rides and sell cotton candy."

Why is education only is for nerds and losers?

"Where will people go to raise capital when Wall Street closes down?"

I'm not implying that Wall Street be closed down. But when we see conditions that result in a collapse like in 2008 doesn't that warrant a reevaluation of the process?

"This rhetoric is not about unions at all. This is old marxist revolution rhetoric, from the workers of the world unite against wharever and whoever the last party memo says song and dance. Obama uses a lot of the same rhetoric but replaced "the workers" with working families etc. This is why his marxist roots do not come through for people that are not familiar more closely with the bulk of communist, and particularily Leninist, rhetoric."

Althouse commented that Hoffa's "war" rhetoric was quite repulsive.

The Koch brothers implied Obama is "Saddam Hussein" and that this is the "Mother of All Wars" that must be fought for the "life or death of this country".

Other than for Charles Koch making his comments in private, it seems both sides are making repulsive comments.

"So your point is that union workers are gripped with envy. Alas. There are many more workers than there are managers so maybe the workers should go back to school and see if they can rise way way uo in the ranks and get some of that easy money for themselves. Ornis it just easier to bitch."

Michael,

I think it's more a sense of fairness than envy. Although I'm sure there is some envy given what we see on how the rich and famous live.

About 18 years ago I took your fed jur class and I always remember you saying, "It is the great liberal dream that if everyone were just smart enough, we'd all agree on policy, etc."

Then I read this sentence in your post: "They [politicians] have different ideas about how to improve things."

That is quite a euphemism. It seems it is the great libertarian/Althouse dream that if disgruntled liberals could just realize that politicians are trying to "improve things," everything would be better.

"Hoffa announces that there are 2 sides aligned in a fight against each other, and he would like anyone who has or wants a jobs to perceive himself or herself as a "worker" and thus a foot soldier in his army, with no independent mind.

Although not in a Union, I'm pretty sure my husband qualifies as a "worker".

Today, he removed two 80 gallon bladder tanks that were waterlogged and defective, installed a new tank, replumbed it, hooked it up to the well with a new Mag Switch to replace the old defective one.

Next he re-connected a water heater that had been removed to install a new floor.

Then drove 75 miles round trip to diagnose a failing well that will need to have a new pump, controller and be replumbed to the bladder tank. This will require the boom truck to pull the pump out of a 320 foot well, one stick of pipe (20 feet) at a time, at a pump depth of 260 feet (they think) that is on 1 1/2 inch galvanized pipe and replace the pipe that has holes in it, install a new pump, rewire the well and pressure test the system before re installing the iron filter system

Also as a favor to one of his LOLs (little old ladies) installed a new toilet assembly for nothing.

Sorry... he doesn't belong to a union and therefore doesn't qualify as a worker. I guess as a small business guy, he is a captialistic pig oppressing the rights of real workers.

Also as a non union scab, he has no vacation days, sick days, holidays off or employer provided health insurance.

Sheesh....these union people make me want to puke.

You know what? If they want to have a war......I think we are ready, armed and motivated.

"As to the financial crisis you can be sure it would not have happened had those who borrowed money paid it back as agreed."

Michael,

Apparently the Fed is suing the banks, which assembled the mortgages and marketed them as securities to investors, because they failed to perform the due diligence required under securities law and missed evidence that borrowers’ incomes were inflated or falsified. Loans were made that should have not been made.

When many of these borrowers were unable to pay their mortgages, the securities backed by the mortgages quickly lost value.

The chief executives of the 50 firms that laid off the most workers so far during the 2008 economic crisis enjoyed salaries that were 42% higher than the average pay of chief executives of other S&P 500 companies.

On a lighter note, Ann Lamott wrote an Op Ed in the LA Times about how unions are "sacred". It was about how she instills a love of unions in her toddler grandson by pretending Lego people are union workers. She gives them names and teaches him all the good old union marching songs.

At first I thought it was a parody but then I looked her up. She apparently believes all this stuff.

Not that she ever seems to have held a job other than an occasional teaching gig. She still sees herself as a "worker" in soildarity with all the union members. (All 6.7% of them, I guess.)

Lamott seems to have been born with a silver spoon. Her father was not a worker but was a writer. He did well enough for himself that he sent her to the Drew School (Current tuition $34,000/yr)

She calls herself, according to the Book of Knowledge "The People's Writer". Not "A people's writer". that tells me pretty much all I need to know about her.

Read the op ed. It is laugh out loud hilarious. I am sure it was not intended to be but that is how she comes across.

The term 'worker' is simply another euphemism employed by the left, the term a debased representation of 1. actual people 2. of which the vast majority belong to a labor union.

Others not fortunate enough to work for one of these labor unions is not a 'worker'. No, they are lower still on the union food chain, down somewhere among the scabs. That's right, you and I. And because we don't belong to their little club well, we can all just go to hell. We can expect union boots to our throats, all so they can continue to dictate just how we will provide for them.

The next couple of years could prove very interesting. The freakout of the Wisconsin labor types (over having to actually contribute a fraction of the cost of health services and the loss of the obviously ridiculous 'right' to collectively bargain against the very people that pay your salary) is very telling and a certain indicator of what will happen on a larger scale soon.

36. Tough shit for "the workers.". I would imagine the average ceo works a thousand times harder than an hourly employee so to be fair they should earn more than a paltry four or five hundred times as much as "the worker.".

Laying off unnecessary workers is one of the harder things a ceo must do to ensure that the union pension funds which have invested in his company receive the returns they crave. It is sad but true that we now find that companies are making more money with fewer workers. What, my friend, can you conclude from that other than the laid off workers were either not working ornwere bird dogging. The ceo should be rewarded for exploiting this

@36 -- The problem with your charts -- particularly chart 6 -- is that they don't take benefits into accounts. Here's another example of the same thing (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704828104576022002280730440.html):

When it comes to wages, the basic story of recent decades is redolent of Scrooge. Real average hourly earnings (excluding fringe benefits) now stand roughly at 1974 levels.

You have to appreciate the word "fringe" in this paragraph. It sounds like the wage data excludes things like free use of the company photocopier. Of course what the data really excludes is health care, retirement plan contributions, and paid time off.

"Also as a non union scab, he has no vacation days, sick days, holidays off or employer provided health insurance."

Is that a good thing? What's wrong with having vacation time, sick days and holidays off?

@ 36 union butt boy

No problem at all as long as you don't expect other people to pay for it for you, you leech on society.

We take vacation and we save our money so we can have days off. We don't come whining to you and expect your tax dollars to pay for our health insurance.

We have to adjust our prices in order to stay competitive as a PRIVATE INDEPENDENT small business.

When times get hard....we don't get to strike and be paid wages by the Union from coerced dues from OTHER 'workers' in order to be able to to extort more money from the employer.

When you extort ever more money from YOUR employer for your own fucking greed, the prices for all of the rest of us 'working non union scabs' (according to you) go up. UP and UP until we can't afford to buy any of the defective overpriced products that you put out.

Contrary to your inflated opinion of yourself, you are not guaranteed a job or guaranteed anything. Hopefully you greedy pigs will price yourself out of the market and soon.

"OK, I see now, Dust Bunny Queen, whose husband is not in a union, was complaining about not having the benefits that union members are provided.

Got it."

He wasn't complaining and neither was she, dork. Just pointing out the differences between a teat-sucking union type and her husband, a hard-working small business owner that doesn't prefer OR require handouts. Dipshit.

Why does the Hollywood and sports industries earn so much money? How come teachers, firefighters and military members don't make millions given what they do for the country? What does that say about our values?

This is actually a really interesting question. One could argue the reason we can afford to pay Michael Vick or Emma Watson so much money is that so money other sports performers and actors are willing to work for so little. Most of the individual pursuing sports and acting careers in the bush leagues (of either) make almost nothing. They work for very little for the shot at making very much. It's just a totally different economic model than the civil service job (or the corporate middle management ladder, for that matter).

Someone who trains as a teacher may have a tough time getting a job because of the barriers to entry created by the union, but if they get a job they will get a decent wage. Same goes for a person who goes through the police academy or becomes a firefighter.

Someone who goes to a baseball instructional league or plays semi-pro football or gets a BA in acting is guaranteed to make almost nothing. Their economic outlook is high risk, high reward.

Poet Laureate Robert Pinsky tells, amusingly, that when he decided to become a poet as a young man, his relatives thought he was crazy. Get a civil service job, they told him, you can't do better than that

"a hard-working small business owner that doesn't prefer OR require handouts. Dipshit."

No. The true definition of a dipshit is someone who would comment on the wage package/benefits/working conditions that an employee has successfully negotiated, based on their own working skills.

If you don't know someone, or their work ethic, but have the cajones to say they are overpaid or undeserving of their compensation because they are in a union -- without even knowing them -- that's dipshit.

It's extrapolating a whole generalization or stereotype, based on your own small observations or envy.

Don't think DBQ was doing that necessarily. While proud of her own, she didn't necessarily piss on the hardworking efforts of ALL union members, and state that they're all scumsuckiung weasels.

Just, it's not for everyone. She'd prefer her own to be self-employed, and is prepared to accept the longer hours, less compensation at first, and minimal salary and benefits that often comes with self employment.

Trust me: there's plenty of hard-working union laborers too, and often, they do some of the dirtiest most dangerous work that the self-employed might never take on, with a minimal risk assessment.

Take care, y'all, in trying to tear others down to build yourselfs up that you don't overgeneralize, eh?

Sounds like he's got a lot on his plate (and really, how many wives of union men go around daily "documenting" all the things their guy done did on the job? Really, your defense is a bit ... over the top, and if he really is that good, why the need to ... "brag" on how hard he works?

Smells like a bit of ... insecurity to me. Isn't independence and self-ability its own reward?

Don't think DBQ was doing that necessarily. While proud of her own, she didn't necessarily piss on the hardworking efforts of ALL union members, and state that they're all scumsuckiung weasels.

There was a time when the Unions were needed in order to obtain decent working conditions. My parents were both Union members and I have photos of my mother walking a picket line. Typographical Workers. Their Union don't exist anymore because........they priced themselves out of work. That and technology which eliminated the need for skilled printers eliminated their job and eliminated their Union.

Sometimes you get what you ask for and it turns out not to be what you really thought you were going to get. Be careful union butt boys. You might not like the results of your actions.

I agree that there ARE hard working people who belong to Unions and who put in a decent day's work. So I don't want to tar all union workers as being the useless self indulgent thuggish pricks like 36 who think that because they are in a UNION that they are somehow better and deserve the title WORKER and others somehow do not.

Overgeneralizing and name calling is the hallmark of the Union movement.

"Even we millionaireandbillionaire bankers have logged millions of air miles and thousands of annual hours in pursuit of our filthy money."

Sitting on your ass in an airplane, waiting to land so you can comp your meals and stay at a fine hotel with food somebody else made for you that you can nicely deposit in a toilet somebody's mama cleaned for you ... yup, that's a working man for sure!

"a hard-working small business owner that doesn't prefer OR require handouts. Dipshit."

No. The true definition of a dipshit is someone who would comment on the wage package/benefits/working conditions that an employee has successfully negotiated, based on their own working skills.

If you don't know someone, or their work ethic, but have the cajones to say they are overpaid or undeserving of their compensation because they are in a union -- without even knowing them -- that's dipshit."

Well, aside from projecting what I said directly towards our 'fiend' here at Althouse on your own personal view of a surely honorable and deserving union rank-and-file-member, and in the process redefining your own personal view of what makes up a dipshit, I beg to differ ;)

I was simply expanding on my earlier comment to 36fsfiend AND NOT YOU about his obtuseness towards DBQ.

Additionally you put A LOT of alleged words in my mouth that I did not speak, along with a whole slew of allegations, bullshit and supposition. Typical woman.

But not using the terms interchangeable. Your mama, and daddy too, weren't "butt boys" presumably.

Thanks for the clarification, and just take care in flinging your terms around like that. Because... not all tradesmen are inclined to look so kindly on a fella's wife with so much extra energy to fling generalized terms around that pretty much insult their core masculinity.

Say: didja ever think of starting a business of your own, or taking up some of the slack in terms of brining in your own salary or wages to help your struggling fella out? Seems like he's working an awful lot, accordint go your daily notes, just to keep you in the fine lifestyle you are accustomed too.

PS: What does anal sex have to do with union membership anyway, DustyPussyGirl?

(Trust me: namecalling, and generalizations, are not the way to go here...)

"Well, aside from projecting what I said directly towards our 'fiend' here at Althouse on your own personal view of a surely honorable and deserving union rank-and-file-member, and in the process redefining your own personal view of what makes up a dipshit, I beg to differ ;)

I was simply expanding on my earlier comment to 36fsfiend AND NOT YOU about his obtuseness towards DBQ.

Additionally you put A LOT of alleged words in my mouth that I did not speak"

Settle down there cowboy. I extrapolated -- show me where I quoted YOU as saying those things? I was saying that ANYONE who thinks that all union members, particularly in the still dangerous fields, and hard trades, are ... ButtBoys would be the prime definition of a dipshit.

But DBQ clarified and backed down from her seeming generalizations, and here you are, good man, "protecting her" when clearly she doesn't need your help to express herself.

"No problem at all as long as you don't expect other people to pay for it for you, you leech on society."

OK

"We take vacation and we save our money so we can have days off. We don't come whining to you and expect your tax dollars to pay for our health insurance."

How about workers not in government operated businesses? Who don't rely on taxes for their benefits?

"We have to adjust our prices in order to stay competitive as a PRIVATE INDEPENDENT small business."

So you're the owner?

"When times get hard....we don't get to strike and be paid wages by the Union from coerced dues from OTHER 'workers' in order to be able to to extort more money from the employer."

What do you do if you have concerns regarding job safety that the management is not actively addressing?

"When you extort ever more money from YOUR employer for your own fucking greed, the prices for all of the rest of us 'working non union scabs' (according to you) go up. UP and UP until we can't afford to buy any of the defective overpriced products that you put out."

Defective overpriced products. Can you provide some examples?

"Contrary to your inflated opinion of yourself, you are not guaranteed a job or guaranteed anything. Hopefully you greedy pigs will price yourself out of the market and soon."

Any complaints about the bankers on Wall Street? Do you think their actions have advedrsly impacted the economy?

"In fact, I'm more than interested to see what will happen when the union slugs who think they are something and who are nothing but a bunch of pampered pussies start a war with the real working class."

"Really, your defense is a bit ... over the top, and if he really is that good, why the need to ... "brag" on how hard he works?"

Well, DIPSHIT, to contrast differences between 'deserving' union types and private businesspeople that don't walk around making others pay for their bennies. They may say they don't get the strokes the unionistas get, this DOES NOT equate to complaining. In your world, MAYBE IT DOES, but not in everyone's world kid. And DOING aint bragging either.

"Smells like a bit of ... insecurity to me. Isn't independence and self-ability its own reward?"

How very elite and condescending of you. The answer, is YES. But of course, like 36fsfiend, you are too freaking obtuse yourself to recognize what she was saying was pride and not complaining.

Sounds like he's got a lot on his plate (and really, how many wives of union men go around daily "documenting" all the things their guy done did on the job?

Probably not many and who cares anyway.

However since I am the billing clerk, bookkeeper, collection agency, ordering and supply central system and computer troubleshooter for our business, I have pretty good damned idea of what is entailed in his business. (and I thought I was retired LOL)

I'm not defensive or insecure and certainly not bragging. Just factual about what a 'working' person does in a day.

I'm pissed. Two different things.

When slugs like Hoffa try to define 'working man' to be Union only. When the teachers in Wisconsin try to define 'middle class' as being only those in Unions and dismiss the rest of the country.....the majority of the country as not counting....I'm pissed and I'm not alone.

"He wasn't complaining and neither was she, dork. Just pointing out the differences between a teat-sucking union type and her husband, a hard-working small business owner that doesn't prefer OR require handouts. Dipshit."

I'm not in a union myself but I did have a uncle who was in a union and worked for the railroad. I wouldn't call him teat-sucking though.

"But of course, like 36fsfiend, you are too freaking obtuse yourself to recognize what she was saying was pride and not complaining."

Sorry DipshitFan.Once she got on the defensive, and began belittling ALL union members with the queer innuendo, then she wasn't braggin on her own anymore.

Yup, there's plenty of hard working, "deserving" union members that do the dirty work every day for very little reward except the knowledge that their work helped keep the gears of society grinding daily. Just like DBQ's fella, they indeed work hard too.

My point is: sure, take on the public unions, and the teachers unions and all the government unions that derive their source of income from taxpayers.

But please, if you are smart, step back from the generalizations. Plenty of tradespeople build, work hard, AND belong to a union.

They don't bend over, like DBQ implies, to get ahead. They work hard, and god bless them for every small concession they have coming to them, often based on years of honest blue-collar skilled labor.

When you confuse these two sectors of unions, when you equate the union bosses with the ones who get the jobs done, when you play the queerdo card with all the ButtBoy macho talk ... it indeed makes one look bad. Like if only she can tear down another woman's hard-working union man, it somehow makes her own hard-working self-employed man a bigger idol in her own wifely eyes.

My point is: if she (and he) are indeed happy with the self-employed career paths they've chosen, why such insecurity with the namecalling? Something's not kosher there, the difference between getting defensive and being proud of your own.

"I'm not in a union myself but I did have a uncle who was in a union and worked for the railroad. I wouldn't call him teat-sucking though."

My cousins in Ireland taught me this ditty, back in '78:

Paddy on the railway picking up stones...Along came an engine and broke Paddy's bones.Ay! said Paddy, that's not fair.Poof, said the engine. I don't care!

Personally, I'd like to see more of those miners in the Deep South unionized. Might give them SOME degree of protection against the corporate white-collar types who so often see their lives as cheap, and not worth even basic investments in worker protections.

Again though, we are talking about different unions than the servicepeople or the government bureacrats, including teachers and law professors.

"Gee....who was it said "We’re going to win that war... President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march… Everybody here’s got a vote... Let’s take these sons of bitches out"

Aw... and you seemed, to this point, like such a practical minded, no nonsense lady until you started buying the sensitive PC language crap that Profs. Reynolds and Althouse are pushing.

If you honestly see violence in that FULL statement -- Everybody here's got to vote. If we go back and keep the eye on the prize, let's take these son of a bitches out and give America back to America where we belong! Thank you very much! -- then surely you musta grown up not in a blue-collar, but in a more gentrified delicate setting?

Yup, he used coarse language in talking about trying to get his constituents to come together, with their eyes on the prize (you did catch the cultural reference, right?) and VOTE THE BASTARDS (or sumnabitches, if you prefer) out of office.

We're all on the same page regarding incumbent pols, I suspect. But please, tell me you honestly heard a threat of violence in that "taking out" language, and I'll just put you down with the PC crowd here then.

Shame. A woman like you, with a working man in the field, and you honestly fold when somebody uses coarsened ... words??

"What do you do if you have concerns regarding job safety that the management is not actively addressing?"

"Well, since we ARE management......as well as employees, should we strike against ourselves?"

What are your thoughts on say coal miners and how they should deal with unsafe conditions not addressed by the owners? Or airline pilots who may be working so many hours that their performance is affected? How should they address those problems if management is not responsive?

"Are you interested in seeing actual blood shed?"

"Gee....who was it said "We’re going to win that war... President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march… Everybody here’s got a vote... Let’s take these sons of bitches out"

And Charles Koch back in June insinuated that Obama was Saddam Hussein and the this upcoming election was the "Mother of All Wars" in a struggle for the "life or death of this country".

Are the unions justified in pleading self defense to that apparent threat?

"Yep these dumbass southern miners could sure use yo hep cause being southerners they cant think for themselves."

MY help? You think I'm an organizer or something?

Nope. JUst a human who sees what a lack of oxygen can do to a man's brain over time. No, you're right.

Those miners are prolly just ButtBoys too, eh, bending over in dark tunnels, hiding out from the bosses just for a little deep hole loving...

Tell me, are you namecallers new to this game? Cuz your insults sure smell fresh from the unwrapped plastic? B-i-l? wtf is that? Sure them union ceo's put in long hours at the meeting tables, the airplanes, and the restaurants. Then, they have to stay up late to talk phone calls and master such language as b-i-l? (Boyfriend in love?)

Trust me, physical labor is much much different than even 20 hours per day of the most cerebral work you could imagine... Please, no pity for them poor overworked (and underproducing) CEO's here. Next thing you'll be telling me the Prez is doing such a bang up job, and putting.in.the.hours (you.can't.imagine!) that he too deserved that taxpayer financed family jaunt to the Cape.